Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Dudley Dead Date: Jul 26, 2010 6:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 69 or 81?

Well, to me you are almost talking about 2 different bands : The band that evolved into the psychedelic beast of 68-69, then the more song oriented band that came after , and went to the end . Most interviews I have seen/heard with Garcia, he wasn't too happy with the writing of the pre-Workingman's period, it was like a "prelude" . Now, like most of us , I love that stuff, but I think something past 69, more honestly represents the band .
Another case could be made for dividing it roughly 66-80, where every year the band sounds quite different ( new material all the time, changing of band members equipment helped ), and post 80 , where the change is slower . I like the whole history, but that 66 >early Brent period I prefer .

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: AltheaRose Date: Jul 26, 2010 10:25am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 69 or 81?

I agree with you, which is partly why, though I love the early 80s, I'd pick 69 over 81. It's not just the energy, drive and intensity; it's also that there are lots more years that are roughly "like 81" than "like 69." It's almost two different bands; the later is present in the earlier, but we can only hear it after the fact.